war in Iraq ?

[s7on3d]

Originally posted by CrawDad
I say that we should just nuke the bastards. It's gonna solve alot more problems that it will create.

You cann't nuke anyone in the middle east. If you do, the fallout would spread to EVERY COUNTRY in the middle east, and a large part of south-west asia and north africa. All you need is for the radioactive dust to be swept (by the wind) 200 miles and you're in allies' countries (like Jordan and Saudi Arabia)... So the nuke NOT an option.

As an Israeli citazen, resident, and ALSO as a proud American citazen, I can say that the idea is right, the reasons are wrong. Iraq is a VERY dangerous country, ruled by a chaos driven madman. Hussein if FILTHY rich and sends $$$ to multiple terrorist orginizations like the Islamic Gihad (who shot my sister's boyfriend's brother in the head 2 exactly weeks ago) and Al-Qaeda. He also sends $ to the familys of suicide bombers (who are responsible for the deaths of more than one or two of my close friends). He builds weapons of mass destruction whenever he has the nessicary materials and info (chemical, biological or nuclear weapons {remember their nuclear reactor?}) . That is why Saddam has to be taken out of any public position and into an electric chair. He is a hatefull dictator, a mass murder, and a terrorist, thus America should attack Iraq.

The reason Bush wants to attack Iraq is because he thinks he can get away with it now. He thinks that the world will support him because of the disgust and pain they feel after 9/11... that won't happen because Iraq is much LESS DIRECTLY involved with the attacks then Yemmen or Syria... so he should change his arguement.

Anyways, in my opinion, do I want a war in Iraq?

NO

Do I think that we need a war in Iraq to destroy Sadaam's regieme?

YES

 

[LiquidMidnight]

Originally posted by British
Which side do you really want to be on? America may not be perfect but we're the best there is. I'm proud to be an American no matter what. At the risk of sounding cliche, if you don't agree with that, then don't live here.

With all do respect, I find it hypocritical when someone says that. The point of living in America is the fact that you are allowed to disagree with your countries motives, policies, leaders, laws, ect. (well, unless Bush tries to guilt you into supporting a war by saying "You're either with us or your with the terrorist" ) It's like saying to someone living in Germany during the early 40's that they should leave if they didn't like the way Hitler was running the place, because your suppose to agree with your leader do to you loving your country. It's possible to love your country and not agree with everything it does.

As far as me, I love the people in America, I just don't care for a lot of the people running the place.

 

[big daddy cool]

Send in the Mossad and SAS, kill saddam and destroy the weapons of mass destruction. Problem solved.






But oh yeah, couldnt do that because the american economy doesnt benefit as much as it isnt a full scale war. oopsy, silly me.

 

[s7on3d]

I can say as a fact that at least 3 people I know have seen Saddam Hussein through the sights of their rifles, but assisnating him won't help, we don't know that the next person to come into power will be any better.

And just so you know, the Mossad is like your MI-6, they (are meant to) spy and NOT actually do anything. The ones who would actually assainate Sadaam are Sayeret Matkal or Shayetet 13.

 

[Velocimaniac]

I'm all for a war in Iraq. I feel like it's wrong of Bush to use the excuse of 9/11 to attack Iraq. However, I feel like Saddam and his dictatorship need to be destroyed. Saddam has been ignoring weapons inspection regulations for years and years. He's bound to have some bad stuff up there, and there's no reason to create weapons of such mass destruction except to use them on other people. However, I don't think troops other than special military squads or such should be sent into Iraq. Key spots could be bombed instead; it would greatly help divert American loss of life. And I read that Saddam has got a brother even meaner than he is. Assasinating Saddam is a good idea, but first his government should be toppled in order to ensure no one else would rise to take his place. Remember Hitler? Appeasement was used on him. Hitler proved that appeasement is just going to make the aggressor more aggressive. I think Saddam is going to attack the US within the next couple of years, so why give him time to build up more weapons if we're going to have to go to war with him anyway? Well, just my two cents...

 

[British]

Well, regardless of whether or not WE see things in "black and white", THEY sure as hell do. There are people out there that want to kill us and they aren't willing to negotiate about it. They aren't going to give up. I think that's the thing that most often gets overlooked. Saddam himself may not have the balls to try to nuke us but I'll bet he'd be more than happy to sell such a weapon to Al Qaeda if and when he gets it.

And who said we've given up on bin Laden? We're hearing less and less about what goes on in Afghanistan, for the simple fact that our military is running out of things to shoot at over there. We're certainly not giving up though. I just read an article a week or two ago about how we are sending a few thousand more troops over there and that they're probably going to be there for awhile.

And Bush has been saying from the beginning that even if we did capture bin Laden this wouldn't be over. Capturing him would be a nice morale boost for us but it really wouldn't change the reality of what Al Qaeda is and what they are capable of.

What's more, we do know that at least some Al Qaeda fled to Iraq. (For all we know, bin Laden himself is holed up there. Where else is he going to go? Detroit?) And again, as Bush said in the beginning, we will make no distinction between the terrorists themselves and the nations that harbor them.

Also, Bush has hinted in the past that he knows more about what Iraq is up to than he is saying. While this has led some to believe that we're storming in there on nothing but a hunch, I for one applaud the move because if we're about to go to war with Iraq, we really don't need them knowing what we know. That would compromise the mission - they would know exactly where we were going to strike next, and either be ready for us or just move their nukes/bin Laden/Saddam/whatever it is they're hiding. (And by "we" I mean our military intelligence, not you and me personally. Us civilians really have no need to know, for example, exactly which presidential palace Saddam's nukes are in. Sure, I'd like to hear all about it, but not at the cost of making our military's job even more difficult than it already is.)

 

[British]

Originally posted by LiquidMidnight


With all do respect, I find it hypocritical when someone says that. The point of living in America is the fact that you are allowed to disagree with your countries motives, policies, leaders, laws, ect. (well, unless Bush tries to guilt you into supporting a war by saying "You're either with us or your with the terrorist" ) It's like saying to someone living in Germany during the early 40's that they should leave if they didn't like the way Hitler was running the place, because your suppose to agree with your leader do to you loving your country. It's possible to love your country and not agree with everything it does.

As far as me, I love the people in America, I just don't care for a lot of the people running the place.

Well I agree for the most part. I did say up there that America wasn't perfect. I would also say, though, that these are special circumstances. This isn't Social Security reform or prayer in schools we're talking about here - these people are trying to kill us.

 

[P. Aaron]

So We Should do nothing, because if we make a stand, someone will get mad.

We should try to understand why people hate us?

The terrorists of the world hate us because they like to hate us. It isn't because they've been wronged. They've been visiting thier evil on everyone else in the world, civilians are always easy targets.

I wish I knew why Americans have such self hatred that they give our sworn enemies the benefit of the doubt.

Being in a war is the worst place to engage in navel gazing.

I suppose we should have tried to understand that the Nazis and The Imperial Japanese were just trying to protect thier culture, and then we came in all mad and swinging.

It's decision time.

 

[supergreg]

Originally posted by CrawDad
I say that we should just nuke the bastards. It's gonna solve alot more problems that it will create.

Congratulations! You have just disgusted me!

 

[ChaosGwar]

Originally posted by Brad Johnson


No offense but you started this post by saying you'd rather be uninformed about what was actually said in this thread and assumed that it would make you do something.

Isn't that a tad misguided? I say that as a former member of the US Air Force and an American citizen.

As far as who actually knows what, I don't think anyone posting here is exactly in the inner circle

Well Brad, I was just going off past experiences. I mean if judgeing by the few posts in the last page and a half as a reference, I don't think I'd want to read all the other posts and rationals that are a "tab misguided."

In any case, I have since gone back and read the entire thread, and ya know, I was right. I;m just restainging myself from quoting half a dozen people and lighting them up for what I believe are truely stupid misguided uninformed statements.

You're right. I doubt very much any of us knows even a fraction of the truth about what is going on. That being said, the crap you hear on the news, all the exclusive information about the planning of the war that EVERY station seems to have (doesn't seem all that exclusive) is only the stuff that the Pentagon wants people to hear. I mean, if our military leaders held back no secrets, we would be in a pretty rough place right now. You saw what happened when someone in the CIA leaked info that we could track Bin Laden through his satelite phone. He stopped using it, and we lost track of him. So yeah, lets just lwt every American citizen in on the whole shebang, and let some of the common folk make some plans for this war and see how it all turns out.

I for one, being a good enlisted puke, am pretty used to not getting the full story. I mean really, why question something when we have no idea what is going on to question it?

 

[RyKnoz]

Originally posted by P. Aaron
Saddam WILL NOT allow Honest weapons inspections.
Saddam WILL NOTallow evidentiary inspections of any kind.
Sanctions haven't worked because the suffering is visited upon the citizens, rather than the despot.

You Know what? Freeing the Iraqi people might not work either.

Bush and Blair are NOT the most dangerous people on the planet.

The reason: We got all these BOMBS and ALL these soldiers, and we're still debating the best way to use them so we can effectively wipe out the TRASH of the world.

WE ARE GOOD! We don't wantonly turn sand into glass, and jubilantly fire our machine guns in the air.

I don't know about that...

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by ChaosGwar


Well Brad, I was just going off past experiences. I mean if judgeing by the few posts in the last page and a half as a reference, I don't think I'd want to read all the other posts and rationals that are a "tab misguided."

Actually that's a different forum

In any case, I have since gone back and read the entire thread, and ya know, I was right. I;m just restainging myself from quoting half a dozen people and lighting them up for what I believe are truely stupid misguided uninformed statements.

I'm not sure why lighting someone up is a smart thing to do. Why get mad because someone says something you think is misguided? Why not talk to them?

You're right. I doubt very much any of us knows even a fraction of the truth about what is going on. That being said, the crap you hear on the news, all the exclusive information about the planning of the war that EVERY station seems to have (doesn't seem all that exclusive) is only the stuff that the Pentagon wants people to hear. I mean, if our military leaders held back no secrets, we would be in a pretty rough place right now. You saw what happened when someone in the CIA leaked info that we could track Bin Laden through his satelite phone. He stopped using it, and we lost track of him. So yeah, lets just lwt every American citizen in on the whole shebang, and let some of the common folk make some plans for this war and see how it all turns out.

I for one doubt very highly that many leaks are accidental. I'd bet the "oops" factor in the CIA is pretty low.

I for one, being a good enlisted puke, am pretty used to not getting the full story. I mean really, why question something when we have no idea what is going on to question it?

If that works for you, cool. I'd personally have a problem putting my head in the sand. I was a good enlisted guy in the past, didn't mean I didn't pay attention to what was going on. I'll be the first to admit that the Iran hostage situation in the late 70's left a bad taste in my mouth that I still have today... and it wasn't because of Iran's involvement, it was the crap that was pulled by US leaders before, during and after.

 

[RyKnoz]

I don't believe you can truly support a war, unless you are willing to fight it yourself.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by RyKnoz
I don't believe you can truly support a war, unless you are willing to fight it yourself.

Most of the people in charge aren't eligible.

I'm always curious as to why some of the younger war proponents who aren't active duty, aren't? Must be a ton of interesting stories out there.

 

[dls59]

Originally posted by dls59


This is one of the most ignorant, irresponsible statements I have ever read. Period.

I probably overreacted in my reply. Actually, the last thing I want to do in this forum is debate the pro's and con's of an invasion into Iraq. However, the comment that we would be no better than the terrorists (I think that's what was said) is just wrong.

The terrorists sought to take innocent CIVILIAN lives with their atrocities. An invasion into Iraq, whether you agree or disagree with it in principle, would be a military operation, and as such, would be aimed at military targets. There is a vast difference, even if you do not agree we should attack Saddam, between a military action against an enemy armed force or regime and an unprovoked attack on innocent civilian targets.

This is why I so strongly disagree with that opinion. However, I fully support your right to disagree with me, and I do respect your opinion, even if different from my own.

Now -- let's play bass.

 

[P. Aaron]

Hey all you naysayers to war in Iraq. There is hope...

The election there is too close to call.

 

[Pacman]

Originally posted by dls59



I probably overreacted in my reply. Actually, the last thing I want to do in this forum is debate the pro's and con's of an invasion into Iraq. However, the comment that we would be no better than the terrorists (I think that's what was said) is just wrong.

This is why I so strongly disagree with that opinion. However, I fully support your right to disagree with me, and I do respect your opinion, even if different from my own.

Well, you obviously didn't read the whole thing then, dls. What he said was that if we nuked Iraq we would be no better than terrorists. And by your own admission, putting civilians to death (as nukes would surely do) is the same thing.


Reading is fundamental.

 

[dls59]

Originally posted by Pacman


Well, you obviously didn't read the whole thing then, dls. What he said was that if we nuked Iraq we would be no better than terrorists. And by your own admission, putting civilians to death (as nukes would surely do) is the same thing.


Reading is fundamental.

You're right. I read quickly and didn't notice the nuke reference. That is a different story. I support conventional warfare if my president and congress say it's necessary, but to drop nuclear bombs on what will certainly be much collateral damage is a different story. Thanks for clearing it up.

And I don't need the "Reading is Fundamental" crap. Thanks.

 

[Brad Johnson]

You completely missed the point that Bruce was responding to and went off on him. What Pacman said about reading being important isn't crap, is it? You wouldn't have blasted Bruce if you had read correctly.

How about we try to understand each other's positions before we launch into attacks

 

[dls59]

Originally posted by Brad Johnson
You completely missed the point that Bruce was responding to and went off on him. What Pacman said about reading being important isn't crap, is it? You wouldn't have blasted Bruce if you had read correctly.

How about we try to understand each other's positions before we launch into attacks

That's fair enough. Point taken.

Dale